N.J.'s 'Whole School' Approach Found Hard for Districts

New Jersey's court-ordered effort to overhaul its urban schools has
been hobbled by problems that have left many schools struggling to
implement state- mandated programs, a study concludes.

In a report covering the first two years of the state's
one-of-a-kind program of mandated "whole school" reform, two university
researchers say that problems that bedeviled the effort's first year
persisted in the second. That finding is "troubling," they say.

The study suggests that a variety of circumstances have conspired to
make what is typically a trying process—the adoption of
schoolwide redesign models—even harder for New Jersey's urban
schools. Those factors include the broad scale of the improvement
measures, the fact that they are playing out amid ongoing litigation
over the financing of city schools, and the simultaneous rollout of a
related change: the mandated switch from district- level to
school-based budgeting.

For More Information

Copies of
"Implementing Whole School Reform in New Jersey: Year Two" can be
obtained by calling (732) 932-2499.

"It might be safe to say that New Jersey is not only rebuilding the
airplane in mid- flight, but also rethinking the physics of lift and
drag," the researchers observe in the study, which was released last
week.

Under a May 1998 ruling in New Jersey's long-running Abbott
v. Burke funding-equity lawsuit, schools in 30 poor districts
were required to adopt whole-school reform models by the current school
year. By the fall of 1998, 72 of the more than 430 so-called
Abbott schools had embarked on comprehensive reform programs,
followed a year later by an additional 83 schools. Since then, the
number of elementary, middle, and high schools that have begun using
various models has risen to 370.

The report, which follows a similar 1999 study that looked at the
program's first year, was co-written by Bari Anhalt Erlichson, an
assistant professor of public policy at Rutgers University in New
Brunswick, N.J., and Margaret Goertz, a school finance expert and a
co-director of the Consortium for Policy Research in Education at the
University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. They are continuing to
study the program, which is now in its third year.

New Jersey is the only state to require whole-school reform on a
broad scale. So as interest in schoolwide redesign as a potential
solution to urban education's formidable performance problems grows,
many experts see the New Jersey experiment as an important test case
("N.J. Schools
Put Reform to the Test," April 21, 1999.)

Common Problems

The new study does not attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of the
various improvement models adopted in the 57 schools the researchers
examined. But it does identify certain implementation problems that
tended to arise with each of the designs being used in those
schools.

The models adopted by the schools in the study were Accelerated
Schools, America's Choice, the Comer School Development Program,
Community for Learning/Adaptive Learning Environment Model, Co-NECT,
and Success For All.

In their report, the authors describe common experiences shared by
schools as they shopped for redesign models and then sought to put in
place both those designs and the related state requirement to move to
school- based budgeting.

Among other findings, the report says the state education
department, and in some instances the developers of the reform models,
fell short in giving schools the support they needed to carry out the
simultaneous changes.

Overly tight timelines and heavy paperwork burdens—associated
both with adopting the improvement models and drawing up school-based
budgets— presented one set of problems, the study found.

Another issue was the disruption in the accustomed governance
relationships between schools, districts, and the state as the state
shifted to dealing directly with schools. Staff turnover, both in the
education department and with the developers of the models was another
obstacle, the authors say.

In a written response to a draft of the report, state education
officials took issue with some of the findings, including one citing a
lack of coordination between the education department's program and
fiscal divisions over school budgeting issues. A spokesman for the
department said last week that officials were reserving further comment
until they had reviewed the final report.

But surveys of New Jersey teachers conducted for the new study found
that many were not strong believers in the models their schools had
selected.

Among teachers whose schools launched the changes in the 1998-99
school year, just 48 percent of respondents in the schools studied said
they believed their respective models were good for their schools. That
figure rose to 59 percent among teachers in schools starting the new
approaches in 1999-2000.

Ms. Erlichson of Rutgers suggested that the mandatory nature of New
Jersey's redesign efforts had contributed to the uneven support among
teachers, as well as to other impediments to successful schoolwide
change.

"The major issue that this study illuminates is the difficulty of
taking comprehensive school reform programs and implementing them in a
mandated context," she said.

The Education Law Center, which brought the 20-year-old
Abbott lawsuit against the state, couldn't agree more. The
Newark-based finance-equity center has taken the state back to court
over its efforts to comply with the 1998 state supreme court ruling,
including the "whole school" improvement initiative.

"We strongly opposed mandating whole school reform from the start,"
said David G. Sciarra, the center's executive director.

Steve Block, the center's director of school reform initiatives,
said the new study pointed up "major deficiencies" in the state- led
effort, and called the persistence of problems from the first to the
second year of implementation "disheartening."

"The findings in the study reflect the anecdotal evidence we get all
the time from people in the schools," he said.

'First Glance'

Robert E. Slavin, an education researcher at Johns Hopkins
University in Baltimore who co-developed Success For All, said the new
study was valuable "because it's the first glance at a statewide effort
of this kind."

From his standpoint, most of the 67 Abbott schools that have
selected Success For All are implementing it well. Some are not,
however, and that presents a host of new questions that policymakers in
the state need to address, he said.

"Programs that are not implemented don't work," Mr. Slavin observed.
"If you can determine they are really doing just a lick and a promise,
something dramatic needs to happen."

James H. Lytle, the superintendent of the 12,000-student Trenton
district, called the new report on target, but he cautioned against
viewing it as an indictment of the court- ordered effort.

"New Jersey is investing more heavily in urban school reform than
any other state in the country," he said. "I hope that any critique can
be construed as a constructive effort to make this work."

Vol. 20, Issue 23, Pages 12, 15

Published in Print: February 21, 2001, as N.J.'s 'Whole School' Approach Found Hard for Districts

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.

Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.